Skip to content

LPE Blog

Two Fallacies of Democratic Design

LPE scholars and fellow travelers often call for a more democratic organization of power in our society. However, in specifying what this entails at the level of institutions, proposals commonly rely on two widespread but mistaken assumptions – the idea that more participation is necessarily more democratic, and the idea that democratizing decision-making within. . .

Weekly Roundup: July 7, 2023

Sameer Ashar on prefigurative lawyering, Chase Foster and Kathleen Thelen on Brandeis in Brussels, and Hendro Sangkoyo on resource raiding in Indonesia. Plus, the first-ever DC LPE happy hour, a call to join the progressive talent pipeline, a new piece by Amna Akbar on non-reformist reforms, and Jonathan Levy’s reflections on Adam Smith in Hyde Park.. . .

Toward Prefigurative Lawyering

Our current moment, filled with peril for all but those with extreme wealth, is one that calls for radical experimentation with utopian institutional and social forms – what are sometimes referred to as “prefigurative” projects. Yet legal education and dominant legal practices tend to constrain the imaginative capacities necessary for. . .

Weekly Roundup: June 30, 2023

Ntina Tzouvala on the ongoing Afghan central bank saga, Eva Nanopoulos on the contradictions of “peaceful” sanctions, and Aslı Bâli on the parasitic relationship between sanctions and economic asymmetry. Plus, last call to apply to the coolest job in the universe, videos from Money as a Democratic Medium 2.0, the Dig tackles AI, David Dayen. . .

Weapons Against the Weak

Since the end of the Cold War, sanctions have served primarily as a way for relatively united Western powers — led by the United States — to impose their preferences on weaker states. The era of unipolarity that has facilitated such one-sided coercion is, however, drawing to a close, and with it perhaps the age of ever-proliferating sanctions.

The Antinomies of “Peaceful” Sanctions

The legal concept and practice of “peaceful sanctions” is ridden with contradictions. To understand these antinomies, and to make sense of the changes in the legal treatment of sanctions over time, we must attend to the material basis of the international legal order – namely, a global but contradictory, crisis-prone, and conflictual capitalist imperialism. . .

Weekly Roundup: June 23, 2023

Aslı Ü. Bâli and Ntina Tzouvala kick off a new symposium on economic sanctions and TWAIL, Jessica Whyte explains why international law is incapable of seeing the harm caused by economic coercion, and Maryam Jamshidi argues that sanctions have empowered a new class of colonizers. Plus, Sandeep Vaheesan on the scourge of pay-for-delay by pharmaceutical companies,. . .

Sanctions’ New Colonizers

In this moment of U.S. financial imperialism, a host of “new” colonizers have emerged, including private plaintiffs holding unsatisfied civil judgments against so-called terrorists, terrorist organizations, and countries designated by the U.S. State Department as state sponsors of terrorism. And just as the colonizers of yesteryear used imperial policies. . .

The Opacity of Economic Coercion

At a time when human rights NGOs rigorously count civilian deaths in armed conflicts, no equivalent accounting is available to victims of a war waged via exchange rates, inflation, and interest rates. The opaque mechanisms through which economic coercion inflicts harm have made it difficult to identify causation, let alone to prosecute its agents under international. . .